Trayvon Martin

[Jenksismyhero]

Oh no! He smoked pot! He tried to look 'tough'!

 

Martin was just another black kid. Like a lot of kids in general, the "normal, good ol' American boys", he used some mild drugs, had some bravado, and got into some minor trouble here and there. Who cares? That's how teenagers in general act because they're dumb. None of this has any relevance to this shooting. Even if Martin had a criminal past, Zimmerman wouldn't automatically be innocent.

 

Yeah, most normal kids get suspended twice from school for burglary and drugs. Most take pictures of themselves with handguns. I get what you're saying, he's not the worst kid ever and he's largely normal, but I think it was ridiculous for people to be like "oh yeah that could have been my kid." I would hope someone who reaches the level of the President could raise a kid who is better than that. I would hope that everyone would aspire to raise kids that are better than that.

 

But as I've already said, I agree this stuff is irrelevant. If the prosecution wants to start claiming Zimmerman killed a saint, well, then it's fair game.

[pettie4sox]

No, but it will go a long way in convincing straight-laced white people that Martin may have been more willing to initiate or escalate the situation...i dunno what the composition of the jury is though...

 

If white people are the naive, I really feel sorry for them. There are so many different ways this scenario can go down it's not even funny. If Zimmerman got his ass kicked and then shot Trayvon after the fact, that's obvious. If Zimmerman chased him down and Trayvon got testy and a skirmish broke out then we have a situation. If Zimmerman was ambushed, got his ass beat, and then fired in self defense, then this should be an open and shut case. My question is, how do you prove any of it with 50% of the witnesses dead?

 

This case is like a wirey, tanglely, thicket of bush.

Edited May 24, 2013 by pettie4sox

[Jenksismyhero]

No, but it will go a long way in convincing straight-laced white people that Martin may have been more willing to initiate or escalate the situation...i dunno what the composition of the jury is though...

 

That's what they're hoping for, but it would be an easier case to sell to the judge if the suspensions were due to fighting or more aggressive behavior. I don't think being a burglar/pot smoker means you're more likely to attack someone. All that stuff i'm guessing will be barred unless the prosecution brings it up.

[iamshack]

If white people are the naive, I really feel sorry for them. There are so many different ways this scenario can go down it's not even funny. If Zimmerman got his ass kicked and then shot Trayvon after the fact, that's obvious. If Zimmerman chased him down and Trayvon got testy and a skirmish broke out then we have a situation. If Zimmerman was ambushed, got his ass beat, and then fired in self defense, then this should be an open and shut case. My question is, how do you prove any of it with 50% of the witnesses dead?

 

This case is like a wirey, tanglely, thicket of bush.

Well, some white people certainly are that naive. Especially older white people who have secluded themselves from urban areas for much of the last few decades.

 

And I agree with you about the rest.

[Jenksismyhero]

If white people are the naive, I really feel sorry for them. There are so many different ways this scenario can go down it's not even funny. If Zimmerman got his ass kicked and then shot Trayvon after the fact, that's obvious. If Zimmerman chased him down and Trayvon got testy and a skirmish broke out then we have a situation. If Zimmerman was ambushed, got his ass beat, and then fired in self defense, then this should be an open and shut case. My question is, how do you prove any of it with 50% of the witnesses dead?

 

This case is like a wirey, tanglely, thicket of bush.

 

That's why this case will come down to whether the jury believes Zimmerman and finds him credible. And that's why the defense had a tough task to reverse the way he was portrayed in the media the weeks following the shooting as just another racist stereotyping an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles.

Edited May 24, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[iamshack]

That's what they're hoping for, but it would be an easier case to sell to the judge if the suspensions were due to fighting or more aggressive behavior. I don't think being a burglar/pot smoker means you're more likely to attack someone. All that stuff i'm guessing will be barred unless the prosecution brings it up.

The fact that he's got a picture of a handgun on his phone and he's giving the finger in another I think goes to the fact that maybe he doesn't shy away from violence or instigating violence. I'm not saying that should get Zimmerman off alone, but like Pettie said, the fact that we really have no way of knowing what actually happened, I think it clouds the issue just a bit more.

[StrangeSox]

Yeah but he objectively was racially stereotyping an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles. None of these pictures change that.

[iamshack]

Yeah but he objectively was racially stereotyping an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles. None of these pictures change that.

No they don't, but racially stereotyping isn't murder, either.

[pettie4sox]

That's why this case will come down to whether the jury believes Zimmerman and finds him credible. And that's why the defense had a tough task to reverse the way he was portrayed in the media the weeks following the shooting as just another racist stereotyping an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles.

 

Being a lawyer yourself, I bet you wouldn't want to touch this case with a 10 foot pole. That phone call really screwed Zimmerman. People can't help but to conclude that he went after him after the dispatcher told him not too. Either way, Zimmerman is pretty screwed regardless of the outcome of the trial.

[Jenksismyhero]

Being a lawyer yourself, I bet you wouldn't want to touch this case with a 10 foot pole. That phone call really screwed Zimmerman. People can't help but to conclude that he went after him after the dispatcher told him not too. Either way, Zimmerman is pretty screwed regardless of the outcome of the trial.

 

Nope, it'll be a b**** for both sides.

 

Edit: and yeah, I really hope he doesn't get hurt if he's found not guilty.

Edited May 24, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[Jenksismyhero]

Yeah but he objectively was racially stereotyping an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles. None of these pictures change that.

 

People like you on a jury frighten me.

[StrangeSox]

Is it possible that the jury could convict him of a lesser charge i.e. manslaughter? Or do they only have the option of guilty/not guilty on 2nd degree murder?

[Jenksismyhero]

Is it possible that the jury could convict him of a lesser charge i.e. manslaughter? Or do they only have the option of guilty/not guilty on 2nd degree murder?

 

Not sure how Florida works, but I'm pretty sure in Illinois you're stuck with the charges you bring.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

People like you on a jury frighten me.

 

Treyvon was an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles. That is 100% objectively true statement of fact. That Zimmerman racially stereotyped him because he was a young, black male is an opinion, but one that I believe is reasonable, well-supported and most likely to be true. These pictures do not change that at all. Martin could have been an ex-felon, yet he would still have been an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles.

 

shack brought up a good point that this could be used to cast doubt on who started the confrontation, if that's the legal theory the state is going with.

 

What these pictures unfortunately do for everyone else is allow people to engage in victim-blaming. Just look to the comments sections on these articles where you see vile and often openly racist statements that Martin was a 'thug' who 'deserved it' and Zimmerman did society a favor by killing this punk before he inevitably committed more crimes.

[pettie4sox]

Nope, it'll be a b**** for both sides.

 

Edit: and yeah, I really hope he doesn't get hurt if he's found not guilty.

 

I don't think he will. I'm just speculating but I think people will soon forget about it with everything else. There will be outrage, maybe a protest or two, but all in all, people will move on. If someone does, I hope they get the book thrown at them for their sheer stupidity.

[StrangeSox]

Not sure how Florida works, but I'm pretty sure in Illinois you're stuck with the charges you bring.

yeah some quick googling seems to indicate that he'd have to be charged with both upfront and a jury could convict of manslaughter but not murder. I wonder why they went with only 2nd degree murder.

[pettie4sox]

Just look to the comments sections on these articles where you see vile and often openly racist statements that Martin was a 'thug' who 'deserved it' and Zimmerman did society a favor by killing this punk before he inevitably committed more crimes.

 

Yeah. That's unacceptable and sad. But people who say s*** like that are trolls or bonafide idiots. The internet and it anonymous factor have given people the audacity to spew their vile filth.

[pettie4sox]

yeah some quick googling seems to indicate that he'd have to be charged with both upfront and a jury could convict of manslaughter but not murder. I wonder why they went with only 2nd degree murder.

 

Isn't 2nd degree murder when you're not planning on killing someone but it happens?

[Jenksismyhero]

Treyvon was an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles. That is 100% objectively true statement of fact. That Zimmerman racially stereotyped him because he was a young, black male is an opinion, but one that I believe is reasonable, well-supported and most likely to be true. These pictures do not change that at all. Martin could have been an ex-felon, yet he would still have been an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating skittles.

 

shack brought up a good point that this could be used to cast doubt on who started the confrontation, if that's the legal theory the state is going with.

 

What these pictures unfortunately do for everyone else is allow people to engage in victim-blaming. Just look to the comments sections on these articles where you see vile and often openly racist statements that Martin was a 'thug' who 'deserved it' and Zimmerman did society a favor by killing this punk before he inevitably committed more crimes.

 

I don't buy that just because you equate black kid with possible criminal activity that's racist when you know that black kids have been committing crimes in the neighborhood. If there was no crime at all in that neighborhood and he thought that, fine, that's racial stereotyping. But those aren't the facts here.

 

[StrangeSox]

Wikipedia tells me it's a non-premeditated murder.

[southsider2k5]

Isn't 2nd degree murder when you're not planning on killing someone but it happens?

 

But there is intent to kill. Manslaughter is where you never had the intent to kill them at all.

[pettie4sox]

But there is intent to kill. Manslaughter is where you never had the intent to kill them at all.

 

Then that is the prosecutor's folly. I don't think anyone thinks that Zimmerman wanted to kill that boy.

[StrangeSox]

I don't buy that just because you equate black kid with possible criminal activity that's racist when you know that black kids have been committing crimes in the neighborhood. If there was no crime at all in that neighborhood and he thought that, fine, that's racial stereotyping. But those aren't the facts here.

Whether or not the racial stereotyping was justified is one thing, but it remains a fact incredibly likely that he did racially stereotype (or profile) Martin and that Martin was an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating Skittles.

 

At best, Zimmerman committed a series of lapses in judgement that led to an innocent kid being shot to death.

[iamshack]

Whether or not the racial stereotyping was justified is one thing, but it remains a fact incredibly likely that he did racially stereotype (or profile) Martin and that Martin was an innocent black kid wearing a hoodie and eating Skittles.

 

At best, Zimmerman committed a series of lapses in judgement that led to an innocent kid being shot to death.

See, this skittles thing is why the defense is emphasizing the marijuana and gun pictures on his phone. You're trying to emphasize his youth with the skittles and they are just saying "wait a minute here, he wasn't just a little boy eating candy on his way home."

 

I think it's perfectly fair.

[StrangeSox]

See, this skittles thing is why the defense is emphasizing the marijuana and gun pictures on his phone. You're trying to emphasize his youth with the skittles and they are just saying "wait a minute here, he wasn't just a little boy eating candy on his way home."

 

I think it's perfectly fair.

I hadn't thought of it like that, but I think you're on to something with the psychology of candy=young, innocent. But he literally was just a kid eating candy on his way home, minding his own business and doing nothing wrong. It could have been a McDonald's cheeseburger or a million other innocent things instead.

 

If the case hinges entirely on the jury's belief of who initiated the physical confrontation, then yes, I can see how some of the bravado stuff is relevant. But the pot-smoking? Flipping the bird? It really shouldn't be, at all. Martin isn't more or less deserving of the protection of the law because he smoked pot.